all humanity. Woman is the highest species of Man." In Science and Health we read: "The ideal man corresponds to creation, to Intelligence and Truth. The ideal woman corresponds to Life and Love. We have not as much authority, in Divine Science, for considering God masculine, as we have for considering him feminine, for Love imparts the highest idea of Deity." Science and Health thus defines intelligence, "Substance; self-existent and Eternal Mind." Having assigned to Love a place higher than that of Eternal Mind, and also Truth, Mrs. Eddy says that because woman corresponds to Love, Eve was the first to confess her fault, "The belief in the material origin of man." She was first "to discern spiritual creation. This hereafter enabled woman to be the mother of Jesus, and to behold at the sepulchre the risen Saviour. This enabled woman to be first to interpret the Scriptures in their true sense, which reveals the idea of God as Love."

Evidently the argument that Love is the highest attribute of God contains the personal plea of the discoverer of Divine Science; but will the argument hold water? God is perfect, therefore his attributes are those of perfection, to wit, perfect attributes. To maintain that Love is higher than Truth is to limit Truth and to limit God through his Truth. Hence God being perfect his attributes admit of no gradation; each is the equal of the others. Thus man is the equal of woman, a conclusion in accord with common sense if not with Christian Science which is itself a religion of Love divorced from Truth; a one-sided religion, a solution of life's enigma wholly from the stand-point of a woman. It is a religion inedaquate as those hard, cruel creeds wherein men, seeking for Truth, divorced it from Love and so gave to the world man's reading of the riddle; a one-sided religion from which the inmost heart of woman shrank, however much she stultified her mind and bowed her head in meek submission.

Mrs. Eddy sometimes dwarfs and even perverts a spiritual conception by conforming it to a physical illustration; for example: "Life is the Creator reflected in his creation. If he dwell within what he creates God would not be reflected but absorbed, and the science of Being would be forever lost." In this antithesis of Swedenborg's doctrine of Divine influx, the conception of a mental reflection is taken from the physical law of optics. Physical light is reflected from the exterior of such bodies as there intercept and turn back the rays of the sun. Physical light entering opaque bodies is therein quenched and lost. The originator of Christian Science should know that the laws of spiritual light transcend those of physical light. Spiritual light is reflected from the interior rather than the exterior of God-encompassed man.

Mrs. Eddy has given to the world an interpretation of the Scriptures. Necessarily that interpretation is Christian Science, for which Christianity has waited these nineteen hundred years.

More than a century earlier than Mrs. Eddy, Swedenborg, speaking as the mouthpiece of the Lord, attributed to the Bible texts a meaning quite at variance with this latest religion of Truth. Choosing from the writings of these two, let us place side by side a few examples of their exposition of both Genesis and the Apocalypse.

66

Swedenborg assures the world that "the spiritual sense of the Word was never discovered until now." "Adam and his wife mean the most ancient church." "Eden means the wisdom of the men of that church." Mrs. Eddy's definition of Adam is Error; a falsity; the belief in 'original sin,' sickness and death." Eve means "a beginning; mortality; finite belief." "Eden stands for the mortal material body." The mighty descending angel of the first and second verse of the tenth chapter of Revelation is, to Mrs. Eddy, Divine Science; the little book in his hand is of course, Science

and Health. Swedenborg explains that the angel signifies the Lord in Divine Majesty and Power, and the little book contains the teachings of the church of the New Jerusalem.

Mrs. Eddy's Key to the Scriptures would square them with Christian Science philosophy, but if that philosophy prove self-contradictory, if its logical outcome be at variance with its premises, then the whole system, like a house of cards, falls flat bringing with it the edifice of interpretation.

Christian Science, standing for Subjective Idealism, drops upon investigation into a Dualism because its utter inability to account for mortal mind, and that error of mortal mind the inharmonious, phenomenal world of sense, argues the existence of an evil principle at war with God. A system holding that God is All, denies the creative act and must conclude that God's every reflection, or idea, is part of himself, or, more strictly, it is himself for the Unity of Being is indivisable. Because of this Because of this outcome, Christian Science contradicts its declaration that God is not in man. Circumscribing God's knowing to a knowledge of his own perfection, Christian Science insults the Divine Providence by denying the purpose of this mortal life. Christian Science has no tears of sympathy like those which Jesus wept. Christian Science denies the lesson taught through the punishment of sin. Though announcing that "To remit the penalty due for evil would be for Truth to pardon error," Christian Science does in fact oppose retributive justice by denying away pain its penalty; and by so doing augments the final penalty. Holding that God requires a witness of his Being, and an object of his Love, Christian Science fails to produce either witness or object. Christian Science fallacy perverts God's Love of his creatures to self-love. Holding to a belief in but one illusionary earth-life for the individual, Christian Science teaching really argues for a succession of

earth lives for every man and every creature of God. Christian Science makes the earthly man an error procreated by an error self-existant because without parentage. In these days of numerous Elijahs, Christian Science has rendered possible a new and greater Mary, and hails her as the mother of the Second Coming. By assuming one attribute of Deity to be higher than all others, Christian Science would prove woman the highest human expression of the Divine. Christian Science opinion that if God dwell in what he creates he would be absorbed and the science of Being lost, makes the creature omnipotent, and the Creator finite. Finally, from the standpoint of illogical metaphysics, Christian Science undertakes an interior interpretation of Scripture. Against the above summary we have this assertion: "If one statement in this book is true, every one must be true for not one departs from its system and rule."

Leaving unnoticed the counter-claim of Dr. Quimby's representatives, the present writer assents to Mrs. Eddy's claim to originality that he may accord to her a doubtful honor, that of sole discoverer of Christian Science.

The far and wide spread of a belief that denies the veracity of physical sense, and therefore the existence of matter per se, is at first thought strange in a socalled practical age, but inasmuch as Christian Science offers more glittering prizes than any other system, ancient or modern, to wit, escape from the penalty of violated law, health instead of sickness, and, eventually, the overcoming of the grave; one sees why the old, tortuous climbing is abandoned for a short and easy ascent to human happiness. And yet true to the disciple, the way of Christian Science is one of peculiar reunuciation, for his goal is the sexless condition of the real man. Because "masculine, feminine and neuter genders are human concepts," sexual impulse must be eradicated. As a beginning, marriage should be but one remove from celibacy.

The error of the marriage relation is permissible if its only object be the production of a higher race, a race of celibates reuniting, each in himself, the male and female principles of Truth and Love. Here is translated to our Western world the doctrine of the Eastern ascetic. This renunciation is the antithesis of the teaching of Swedenborg; it is offense and folly to the ordinary man, it is the crucial test of the disciple who will, except in individual instances, doubtless fail and just here because of the vast preponderance of the sexual impulse which, from the Christian Science standpoint, is of all beliefs the most obstinate because upon it seems to depend the perpetuation of life on our globe.

To Mrs. Eddy may be accorded pure desire of benefiting mankind; probably her mistakes are those of the head and not of the heart. That she speaks from conviction these words would indicate; "No human pen or tongue taught me the Science contained in Science and Health and neither tongue or pen can ever overthrow it.." "The true Logos is demonstrably Christian Science." "This Science has come already, and come through the one whom God called." Despite these assumptions it is imperative that before constructing an all-comprehensive system, a philosophy, one examine critically other systems. Had this been done, Mrs. Eddy would have known, for instance, that Spinoza failed because his postulation of one pure, homogenous substance the totality of Being-rendered inexplicable the conditioned, the diverse, the illusionary many. She would have have known both how and where thinkers of note have made shipwreck, and so she would have escaped those dangers of rock and shoal awaiting the chartless voyager on the sea of speculative thought. Despite every objection urgeable against Christian Science, it has been promoter of much good. In the presence of an enthroned materialistic philosophy like that of Locke and his followers down to Herbert Spencer, it asserts the claims of

Idealism. In the hearts of multitudes it is dethroning matter by proving the kingship of Mind. It emphasizes the need of cheerfulness and the optimistic outlook, and, as one result, the thoughts of many a spleeny imaginer have been turned from self. As a novel and militant heterodoxy against a narrow and inadequate orthodoxy, it is forcing men from the old ruts. It stands for the man that was before the moment of human generation. It holds him and every other creature of God to be, in noumenon, a dweller of Eternity, that which the earthly man has divided into past, present and future. It utters a wise warning against the materialistic tendencies and general harmfulness of much in modern Spiritualism. Its ethical requirements are the highest attainable, and to blind belief in ancient dogma, it imparts that desire for sight which may yet result in the perfect vision.

Although Christian Science fails to answer the question of questions, “What is Truth ?" let no one doubt that to the final solution of that question the universe is pledged. A gradual revelation, Truth bursts and blazes not on any seeker, no, not on any prophet or seer. One by one the evils are torn from its inmost shrine. Rung by rung, up the ladder of life, man emerges into the light, leaving in the ever-deepening dark of error those old truths which once did seem to satisfy.

The Divine Architect wills that men behold his creation with no falsifying eye. Therefore, Truth, the Archetypal, has been the searched for, the desired of highest moments, the fulfillable dream, since sages and prophets first drew mortal breath. And unto Truth mankind upbuilds a temple lofty-domed that those afar may see, and, seeing, gather nigh to worship. But weakness, error, is grained in the corner-stone, and in the joining of every arch, and in the foundation of every pillar. every pillar. Upon the fall of that temple, men, wiser with purchased wisdom, build anew, and on the ruin of that building, rear again. Surely it shall be that the temple of Truth some day doth stand

based upon adamant, its walls unshakable and crumbling not. It fronts the rising east; the sun of Truth illumes with morn its dome of drossless gold. Beheld afar 't is as a voice of wooing to the world; "Come ye up to Jerusalem ye tribes of Men! Haste ye to gather at the shrine of Truth! Let the nations

tarry not, and let the uttermost isles of the sea make journey to the City of the Light. There evil entereth not, nor any sickness or sorrow, neither hath death dominion over man, for all reward of righteousness is with the sons of God." EDWARD C. FARNSWORTH.

Portland, Maine.

CHI

HRISTIAN Scientists who read Mr. Farnsworth's article will be pleased with his comparatively kind attitude, despite a few altogether unargumentative and uncalled for lapses into ridicule, and with his frank recognition of much of the good which Christian Science is accomplishing. They will be more surprised, however, to find that one who has felt impelled to call attention to the misunderstanding and consequent misjudgment of the many who have assailed Christian Science, should proceed to give such abundant evidence of misapprehension of the subject and fall into errors from which truth-seeking study and honest inquiry of intelligent Christian Scientists would certainly have saved him. He avers the need of a broad, philosophical view and attitude upon the part of critics, and yet treats some of the most important and most easily verified data of Christian Science with indifference.

To illustrate: he declares that it presents an exalted exalted ethical ideal, and emphasizes the great practical value of many of its fundamental teachings. Nevertheless, he overlooks the very significant fact that it stands for the con*The quotations from Science and Health which appear in this article are from the 1907 edition, and are made by the special permission of Mrs. Eddy.

tinuity and availability of the divine law which Christ Jesus declared he came to fulfill, and through the apprehension of which he performed his works of healing, and that the great body of the adherents of Christian Science have been led to accept its teachings, despite their bitter prejudices, through the healing of sickness and sin in themselves or others whom they have personally known. The astonishing growth of the Christian Science movement to which the critic refers would never have been chronicled except for its espousal of the faith and practice of the early Christian church, and the unnumbered demonstrations over all manner of diseases, which have been so definite as to convince even the most unbelieving. And yet, to these salient facts of Christian Science-its insistent loyalty to the teaching and spiritual demonstrations of Christ Jesus, and its redoing in large measure of the works which he said would attend "them that believe"-the critic makes no reference whatever! It is a case of reading Shakespeare without finding Hamlet.

Mr. Farnsworth's foremost and oftrepeated criticism of Mrs. Eddy is that she does not explain for him the origin of evil, or mortal mind, with which evil is identified in Christian Science; and respecting this matter his dissatisfaction

with Christ Jesus must be equally pronounced, since he also failed to strangle this bête noire of past religious theorists, save as He did so by dispelling evil, and thus removing the occasion of the question. He said: "If I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you."

In reply to the critic's strictures it must be said that whatever else Christian Science may be, it certainly is not a philosophy of the origin of evil. It has very much to say respecting the nature of evil; namely, that it is without substance, intelligence or true being (since God, good, is all, infinite), and also respecting the way of escape from human bondage to the illusion thereof. But, following the example of the great Nazarene, it treats the question of evil's origin as one which is best answered by proving the nothingness of evil; and therefore that it has no origin. The results attending Mrs. Eddy's course in this matter, as compared with that of the unnumbered philosophers who, according to the critic, have found only confusion and defeat in their attempt to solve the problem, must certainly commend it to all who are interested in the betterment of mankind and the advance of philosophy and of religion. It is manifest folly to try to find the principle and logical development of that which is unreal or supposititious. Moreover in the nature of the case, this endeavor is prohibited to him who attains to a realization of the allness of God, good. Jesus declared the omnipresence and omni-action of the infinite Life that is Truth and Love. "I can of mine own self do nothing," said he. "My Father doeth the works." He also said that evil (the devil) “has no truth in him." If Jesus was right, and if, as would be generally conceded, there is no reality in untruth, then the question of evil's origin may be fittingly relegated to the consideration of such sage schoolmen as in the past were wont to discuss the question of the total number of devils that at the same instant could disport

themselves upon a needle's point. The only practical question respecting a schoolboy's false notion is the question of its disposal, and all untruth, evil, is but the declaration and effect of false sense. "The Lord he is God; there is none else beside him" (Deut, 4: 35); hence evil has no real existence, entity or power.

Systems of philosophy, whether Christian or pagan, which begin with material sense experience, and reason inductively therefrom, are necessarily compelled to consider this question, since in mortal belief and experience evil is a mighty actuality. The divine idealism of Jesus and of Christian Science begins, however, with the revelation of God as infinite good, the only Cause and creator; and reasoning deductively therefrom, it pronounces unreal, of the nature of falsity, and hence unrelated to being, all that does not consistently spring from and articulate with this infinite good; hence its one endeavor with respect to evil is to eliminate false belief, just as all educational systems aim to dispel ignorance by proving that in an intelligent and logical universe it cannot be. If in passing by the question of the "origin of evil" Mrs. Eddy has disregarded the demands of materialistic critics, she certainly has not neglected the needs of such critics and of all mankind, for in showing them the falsity of the belief in the reality and power of evil, she has disclosed and demonstrated the way of escape from evil, which is the one matter of practical import.

Next to its failure to satisfy our critic respecting the origin of evil, Christian Science most offends him, it would seem,' because of its denial that there is any good or gain in evil,-that it is serviceable in the making of God's man. Mr. Chesterson tells us that Mr. Browning "believed in the utility of error." So does the Higher Critic and New Theologist, who declares that "the imperfection of the world to-day is due to God's will"; and yet, if these be right, how could evil